Secondly, in any event, I have a discretion to say whether this case should be tried summarily or by ordinary action. Section 52(2) of the Act requires the judge to consider whether “the right to possession may properly be determined in a proceeding under this part”. Bigelow, J., said, in Diminyatz v. Potopchuk, 1944 CanLII 193 (SK QB), [1944] 3 W.W.R. 292, at page 293: The summary procedure against an over-holding tenant should only be applied when ‘the right to possession may properly be determined in a proceeding under this Act’. The order should not be made if there is an involved issue of fact to be tried . . .
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.